71
   

Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

 
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Jun, 2008 05:14 pm
ican711nm wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
Yes I can make the water slosh around in my bathtub too and the water line will be higher on one side than the other during such sloshing. So yes there are the predictable tides and the less predictable but inevitable storm surges and tsumanis.

We aren't talking about those, however. We are talking about land being 'permanently' lost to rising seas. I'm still waiting for somebody with more expertise than I have on the subject to chime in on that.

You do that to the water in your bathtub and the moon does that to the water in the earth's oceans. Also storms over the oceans do the same thing. Some intense hurricanes have sucked up the level of ocean water underneath their centers about 50 feet.


Yes, as I indicated in my post. But what is accounting for the reported permanent sea rise as we keep hearing about people losing their land to permanently rising seas? Is it in fact ice melt that is causing the seas to rise? Or is the land sinking?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Jun, 2008 05:48 pm
parados wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
Steve 41oo wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
The ice in my glass raises the level of the diet Coke in the glass and, if I allow the ice to melt without drinking any, the level of the combined liquid goes way down in the glass.
try the experiment without the prior double vodkas.


Wow, I've never had a double vodka, but since you obviously have, are you saying that if there is vodka in the glass, the phenomenon I described doesn't occur?

I think Steve is merely pointing out that reality is quite different from what you just related. Unless you leave the glass long enough for water to evaporate the melting of the ice won't make the water level go way down. There will be more water in the glass but as long as the ice floats in the glass when you start the water level on the glass won't change. (except for expansion as it warms up.)


You are correct that the water level does not go 'way down' as I just conducted a kitchen experiment to test the theory. Starting with ice and water--water level at the brim--with insufficient time for any significant evaporation to occur, the level of the water does retreat below the brim as the ice melts but only so slightly. So then we can conclude that melting sea ice is pretty much a zero sum game so far as sea levels go?

Following McG's post and the post I hunted up to check his out, I concede that there would be significant sea level rise should all the land ice melt; however, from those projected photos I posted, it doesn't look like the Earth would be uninhabitable even then. It would be different from what it is now.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Jun, 2008 05:55 pm
But hey, you AGW gurus out there, here's your chance to save the world. ABC is soliciting amateur videos to support a planned program intended apparently to strike the fear of God into every heart:

Scientists From Around the Globe Join ABC News in a Forum on Surviving the Century
Join the Debate: We Want Your Thoughts, Videos on the Earth's Future
June 12, 2008

http://a.abcnews.com/images/Technology/earth_2100_080611_mn.jpg A dramatic preview of an unprecedented ABC News event called "Earth 2100."

Are we living in the last century of our civilization? Is it possible that all of our technology, knowledge and wealth cannot save us from ourselves? Could our society actually be heading towards collapse?

According to many of the world's top scientists, the answer is yes, unless we take action now.

This September, in Earth 2100, a dramatic ABC News 2-hour broadcast, the greatest minds across the globe will join together in a countdown to the year 2100 to tell us what we must do to survive the next century ……
And what may happen if we don't.

The time to act is now, says Peter Gleick, president of the Pacific Institute.

"The 21st century is going to be the century which determine[s] whether we live or die as a sustainable species," Gleick said. "As populations grow, as our use of resources grows, I think we get closer and closer to that edge."

Experts say that extreme changes in climate, combined with dwindling resources, famine, war and disease have the potential to create a post-apocalyptic world in less than a hundred years. Harvard University and Woods Hole climatologist John Holdrens says we cannot continue going down the same path.


"If we continue on business as usual, we are going to see more floods, more droughts, more heat waves, more wildfires, more ice melting, faster sea level rise," Holdren said.

"We really have less than a decade to start getting this right. If we're still dragging our feet in 2015 I think it really becomes at that point almost impossible for the world to avert a degree of climate change that we simply will not be able to manage without intolerable cost and consequences."

In order to avoid this chilling future, we have to first imagine it. In an unprecedented Internet event, ABC is inviting people from around the world to bring the future to life.


We are asking you to use your imagination to create short videos about what it would be like to live through the next century if we stay on our current path. Using predictions from top experts, we will brief participants on global conditions in the years 2015, 2050, 2070 and 2100 -- and we want you to describe the dangers that are unfolding before your eyes.
Submitted videos will be combined with the projections of top scientists, historians, and economists to form a powerful Web-based narrative about the perils of our future. We will also select the most compelling reports to form the backbone of our two-hour primetime ABC News broadcast: Earth 2100, airing this fall.
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=5045549&page=1
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Jun, 2008 06:07 pm
THE DISSENTS OF THE SCIENTIFIC DISSENTERS

0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Jun, 2008 06:14 pm
THE DISSENTS OF THE SCIENTIFIC DISSENTERS

Quote:

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.SenateReport#report

147.

German scientist Ernst-Georg Beck, a biologist, authored a February 2007 paper entitled 180 Years of Atmospheric C02 Analysis by Chemical Methods that found levels of atmospheric CO2 levels were not measured correctly possibly due to the fact that they measurements did not fit with hypothesis of man-made global warming. The abstract to the paper published in Energy and Environment reads in part, ""More than 90,000 accurate chemical analyses of CO2 in air since 1812 are summarized. The historic chemical data reveal that changes in CO2 track changes in temperature, and therefore climate in contrast to the simple, monotonically increasing CO2 trend depicted in the post-1990 literature on climate-change. Since 1812, the CO2 concentration in northern hemispheric air has fluctuated exhibiting three high level maxima around 1825, 1857 and 1942 the latter showing more than 400 ppm." The paper concluded: "Most authors and sources have summarized the historical CO2 determinations by chemical methods incorrectly and promulgated the unjustifiable view that historical methods of analysis were unreliable and produced poor quality results."
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Jun, 2008 06:15 pm
Foxy wrote-

Quote:
Does an ocean behave differently than the water in my bathtub?


I should jolly well hope so.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Jun, 2008 07:18 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
ican711nm wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
Yes I can make the water slosh around in my bathtub too and the water line will be higher on one side than the other during such sloshing. So yes there are the predictable tides and the less predictable but inevitable storm surges and tsumanis.

We aren't talking about those, however. We are talking about land being 'permanently' lost to rising seas. I'm still waiting for somebody with more expertise than I have on the subject to chime in on that.

You do that to the water in your bathtub and the moon does that to the water in the earth's oceans. Also storms over the oceans do the same thing. Some intense hurricanes have sucked up the level of ocean water underneath their centers about 50 feet.


Yes, as I indicated in my post. But what is accounting for the reported permanent sea rise as we keep hearing about people losing their land to permanently rising seas? Is it in fact ice melt that is causing the seas to rise? Or is the land sinking?

Maybe what has been reported about average increases in sea level is malarkey. Maybe what they are observing is nothing more than a wobbling surface caused by earth's wobbling spin axis, or by variations in the sun's irradiance (liquid water expands when heated and contracts when cooled; freezing water floats on water while reducing unfrozen water levels, and melting ice raises water levels). Or it is caused by the rotation of the earth such that different halves are in the sun and in the dark on a moment by moment basis. Also, weather or geological changes can cause that wobbling. Then again maybe there are in fact no such changes, or at least no such changes that justify humans meddling in each other's lives.

More importantly, maybe humans contribute insignificantly to that ocean surface wobbling.

Maybe we should move to Mars or into ocean liners!
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Jun, 2008 07:26 pm
ican711nm wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
ican711nm wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
Yes I can make the water slosh around in my bathtub too and the water line will be higher on one side than the other during such sloshing. So yes there are the predictable tides and the less predictable but inevitable storm surges and tsumanis.

We aren't talking about those, however. We are talking about land being 'permanently' lost to rising seas. I'm still waiting for somebody with more expertise than I have on the subject to chime in on that.

You do that to the water in your bathtub and the moon does that to the water in the earth's oceans. Also storms over the oceans do the same thing. Some intense hurricanes have sucked up the level of ocean water underneath their centers about 50 feet.


Yes, as I indicated in my post. But what is accounting for the reported permanent sea rise as we keep hearing about people losing their land to permanently rising seas? Is it in fact ice melt that is causing the seas to rise? Or is the land sinking?

Maybe what has been reported about average increases in sea level is malarkey. Maybe what they are observing is nothing more than a wobbling surface caused by earth's wobbling spin axis, or by variations in the sun's irradiance (liquid water expands when heated and contracts when cooled; freezing water floats on water while reducing unfrozen water levels, and melting ice raises water levels). Or it is caused by the rotation of the earth such that different halves are in the sun and in the dark on a moment by moment basis. Also, weather or geological changes can cause that wobbling. Then again maybe there are in fact no such changes, or at least no such changes that justify humans meddling in each other's lives.

More importantly, maybe humans contribute insignificantly to that ocean surface wobbling.

Maybe we should move to Mars or into ocean liners!


Maybe. Now you know perfectly well I'm on the skeptic side of the ledger when it comes to proof of AGW causing any significant problem for humankind. But when you read articles like this, somebody is lying or islands actually are disappearing. So if the oceans aren't rising enough to swallow them, what is happening to them?

Quote:
Rising seas, caused by global warming, have for the first time washed an inhabited island off the face of the Earth. The obliteration of Lohachara island, in India's part of the Sundarbans where the Ganges and the Brahmaputra rivers empty into the Bay of Bengal, marks the moment when one of the most apocalyptic predictions of environmentalists and climate scientists has started coming true.


As the seas continue to swell, they will swallow whole island nations, from the Maldives to the Marshall Islands, inundate vast areas of countries from Bangladesh to Egypt, and submerge parts of scores of coastal cities.

Eight years ago, as exclusively reported in The Independent on Sunday, the first uninhabited islands - in the Pacific atoll nation of Kiribati - vanished beneath the waves. The people of low-lying islands in Vanuatu, also in the Pacific, have been evacuated as a precaution, but the land still juts above the sea. The disappearance of Lohachara, once home to 10,000 people, is unprecedented.

It has been officially recorded in a six-year study of the Sunderbans by researchers at Calcutta's Jadavpur University. So remote is the island that the researchers first learned of its submergence, and that of an uninhabited neighbouring island, Suparibhanga, when they saw they had vanished from satellite pictures.
MORE HERE
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Jun, 2008 07:58 pm
Foxfyre wrote:

...
Now you know perfectly well I'm on the skeptic side of the ledger when it comes to proof of AGW causing any significant problem for humankind.
...

Yes,I know that! Sorry, I should have explained my purpose in posting what I did. I posted what I did not to tell you anything you didn't already know. I posted it to supplement what you had already posted to emphasize how ridiculous are the published claims about humans causing increasing ocean levels when there are many good reason to believe that humans have had nothing to do with it.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Jun, 2008 08:32 pm
ican711nm wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:

...
Now you know perfectly well I'm on the skeptic side of the ledger when it comes to proof of AGW causing any significant problem for humankind.
...

Yes,I know that! Sorry, I should have explained my purpose in posting what I did. I posted what I did not to tell you anything you didn't already know. I posted it to supplement what you had already posted to emphasize how ridiculous are the published claims about humans causing increasing ocean levels when there are many good reason to believe that humans have had nothing to do with it.


Oh I know you know and I wasn't chiding you either. After my silly argument with the melting ice stuff I at least have learned how that works today, both with frozen sea ice and ice sitting on land. But I am still perplexed re much of the reported phenomenon that just doesn't seem to square with other stuff that most of the skeptics agree on. Much that I still don't know and want to know.

With all the evidence being put out there by some pretty impressive people, I am becoming more and more comfortable with a stance that resists excessive government meddling that is supposed to reverse global warming. But with so many heads of state buying into it, including our own and whichever guy succeeds him, I'm beginning to think we better start resisting a bit more vigorously if resistance is the best way to go on this.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Jun, 2008 08:33 pm
And with that I'll bid all you good people good night. I have two brand new movies I want to watch before sleep.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Jun, 2008 08:46 pm
ican711nm wrote:
Maybe what has been reported about average increases in sea level is malarkey. Maybe what they are observing is nothing more than a wobbling surface caused by earth's wobbling spin axis, or by variations in the sun's irradiance (liquid water expands when heated and contracts when cooled; freezing water floats on water while reducing unfrozen water levels, and melting ice raises water levels). Or it is caused by the rotation of the earth such that different halves are in the sun and in the dark on a moment by moment basis. Also, weather or geological changes can cause that wobbling. !


You gotta give ican credit. He doesn't mind letting everyone know how ignorant he really is about science.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Jun, 2008 09:50 pm
parados wrote:
ican711nm wrote:
Maybe what has been reported about average increases in sea level is malarkey. Maybe what they are observing is nothing more than a wobbling surface caused by earth's wobbling spin axis, or by variations in the sun's irradiance (liquid water expands when heated and contracts when cooled; freezing water floats on water while reducing unfrozen water levels, and melting ice raises water levels). Or it is caused by the rotation of the earth such that different halves are in the sun and in the dark on a moment by moment basis. Also, weather or geological changes can cause that wobbling. !


You gotta give ican credit. He doesn't mind letting everyone know how ignorant he really is about science.


Then prove to us how smart you are and refute with something other then that.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Jun, 2008 10:02 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:


Do you mean to suggest Walter that I haven't faithfully transcribed the article or are you one of those folks who must know where an article was published in order to determine if it makes any sense?

I would think googling "Jim Manzi" would be more helpful in establishing context and Manzi's bonafides.

Wikipedia

You'll even find this excellent article (Which, by the way, was also published in The National Review.

Prediction Time
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2008 01:07 am
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Do you mean to suggest Walter that I haven't faithfully transcribed the article or are you one of those folks who must know where an article was published in order to determine if it makes any sense?


I'm neither suggesting anything nor am I one of those folks ...

I'd just thought that you forgot to give the source by mistake.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2008 01:08 am
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Do you mean to suggest Walter that I haven't faithfully transcribed the article or are you one of those folks who must know where an article was published in order to determine if it makes any sense?


I'm neither suggesting anything nor am I one of those folks ...

I'd just thought that you forgot to give the source by mistake.


Right.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2008 06:19 pm
Finn wrote-

Quote:
Do you mean to suggest Walter that I haven't faithfully transcribed the article or are you one of those folks who must know where an article was published in order to determine if it makes any sense?


There's millions like that. If they read that Hitler liked Charmin toilet paper best they would start wiping their arses on sandpaper.

Godwins Law they call it.

It's a good thing actually Finn. It's a guide on who to avoid in the pub.
0 Replies
 
miniTAX
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Jun, 2008 01:59 am
As to sea level rise, here are the risks for doomsayers and it's high time this happens. It reminds me the Brent Spar case.

Quote:

Estate owners sue Greenpeace for prediction

The organisers' graphic prediction on how global warming will affect La Manga has caused sales of houses in the coastal area to drop by 50 percent.

11 June 2008

MADRID - A group of real estate developers and property owners in La Manga del Mar Menor - a spit of sandy, low-lying coastal land and Murcia's premier beach resort - are threatening to take Greenpeace to court over its graphic predictions of what global warming may do to the area, which they say have caused house prices to plummet.

The lawsuit, which the plaintiffs plan to present unless Greenpeace agrees to an out of court settlement of almost EUR 30 million in damages, comes more than six months after La Manga featured prominently in a photo book published by the environmental organisation that was intended to shock Spain into action on climate change.

Along with photos of a dried up Ebro River in Zaragoza and a desert in an area of Valencia now filled with lemon and orange groves, the book, Photoclima, shows digitally modified photos of La Manga submerged in water with only the tops of hotels, apartment blocks and palm trees emerging from the blue Mediterranean.

Greenpeace says the book is a graphic portrayal of the conclusions of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which has predicted that global warming will cause sea levels to rise around the world over the coming decades.

"We want to create alarm and a call to action," Juan López de Uralde, Greenpeace's director in Spain, said when the book was published.

The photographs certainly caused alarm in La Manga. According to José Ángel Abad, a lawyer who has taken up the case of the area's aggrieved developers and home owners, prices have plunged by "50 percent" in recent months - a dramatic fall even in light of the end of a nationwide house price boom.

Manipulation
"Greenpeace manipulated the expected rise in sea levels of half a metre to cause alarm. It has sunk the real estate market: no one is buying and everyone has put their apartments up for sale," Abad claims.

He says his clients are seeking EUR 27 million in damages to cover the decrease in the value of their properties.

However, Greenpeace has no intention of settling out of court, arguing that the La Manga property owners are trying to "blackmail" it into footing the bill for their speculation in the real estate market.

"They're trying to blame Greenpeace and its campaign for the problems they have encountered in a market saturated thanks to real estate speculation," Uralde said this week. "We are not going to be intimidated."

[El Pais / Ángeles Espinosa / Expatica]

source
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Jun, 2008 02:06 am
Defending the urban destruction of La Manga ... :wink:


Well, Spain is currently suffering a housing slump after enjoying years of building boom.
And additionally, thousands of houses have to be demolished because they were built illegally.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Jun, 2008 02:09 am
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Defending the urban destruction of La Manga ... :wink:



http://i26.tinypic.com/66yws0.jpg http://i26.tinypic.com/2e6hpix.jpg
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.12 seconds on 10/14/2024 at 12:14:09